For reference, this is what David said:“If the ‘Brentford Taliban’ tries this sort of nonsense in their own wards they will be confronted with ‘shock and awe’ by their own constituents. That’s why they are trying out their crazy schemes in Chiswick.”And this is what Caroline said:"The Taliban are a group .... that have butchered their way across Afghanistan torturing and murdering women children disabled people, socialists and foreigners. To refer to 3members of the Labour Party who favour cycling as a mode of transport ... as the "Brentford Taliban" is ..... morally bankrupt and extremely stupid."Your argument is that both David and Caroline are using the term in exactly the same way - quoting someone else. Thus, if it is OK for Caroline to say it, it must be OK for David too.Russell first used the term - he said other people were using it to describe the Labour group. Russell may have heard it on OneChiswick or made up the term himself and decided to use it in the form of "other people are saying" which is a fairly common trick to get a controversial point across while having a bit of deniability should you get criticised for using inflammatory language.David's use of quotation marks is similar - however, he not only borrowed Russell's term and directed it at the Labour councillors, he embellished it with militaristic language (which he also put in quotation marks despite Russell not having used that phrase) to reinforce the point.There is nothing there to suggest that this was not David's opinion.(If you are arguing on the basis of quoting a libel, then perhaps Caroline's (and my) usage might be considered libellous by repeating even if to discredit, but then David's usage would certainly be also.)
Ed Saper ● 1847d